> On Sept. 21, 2014, 6:11 nachm., Thomas Lübking wrote: > > kdeui/util/qosxkeychain.h, line 99 > > <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120202/diff/2/?file=314175#file314175line99> > > > > If OSXKaychain is an exported class (i don't know), this is an ABI > > incompatible change. > > > > It's also massively invasive and adds quite some overhead. > > > > Why did you not just remove the #ifdef from the slot declaration in > > Wallet (former patch) and #ifdef the implementation body instead? > > (There are several such internal slots present, you don't have to "fix" > > the Wallet architecture with this patch ;-) > > > > > > If there's absolutely no other solution and you do not want to add the > > slot unconditionally, you can still reimplement protected ::timerEvent() > > and do the timer "the hard way", ie. "myTimer = startTimer(timeout); ... if > > (te->timerId() == myTimer()) { blahFoo; } else BaseClass::timerEvent(te);" > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I would never have done things this way if QOSXKeychain was an exported > class... but I'm sensible to the overhead argument. I also realise I could > probably have declared it `protected QObject`. > I considered your suggestion, but decided against it because it would > require patching kwallet.cpp too. Or at least I think it would, I presume one > has to provide an implementation for every member function that's declared in > the header? Unless one can make the declaration virtual and only provide an > implementation in kwallet_mac.cpp (the sort of detail I just cannot seem to > memorise :-/ )? > > Thomas Lübking wrote: > Ah, I now see: The various backends do not inherit a common base but are > just split by architecture (on the same header) > > As long as it's not referenced, a function does not have to be > implemented. > BUT: moc will referece all slots, so NO. YOU MUST ADD IMPLEMENTATIONS > EVERYWHERE. > > (What you must not do as well in this regard, is to introduce pure > virtual functions, ie "virtual void foo() = 0;" - the class becomes abstract > by this and cannot be instatiated) > > So the remaining option would be "int myTimer = > QObject::startTimer(timeout);" > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Is it a really a big issue to introduce an empty and unused slot in the > other Wallet implementation? (After all, "my" Wallet implementation has a > number of slots too that are there only to satisfy the needs of the other ;) ) > > Thomas Lübking wrote: > Not from my POV - it's far less invasive than altering the private > baseclass. > You "decided against it" (although, timerEvent() would have to be > implemented everywhere just as well) > > > Suggestion: isolate it by adding a QObject inheriting member to > OSXKeyChain (to call a slot there) for this will no longer be a problem with > Qt5 (YEAH for lambda slots! =) > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Well, I "decided against it" until I realised it wasn't really a big deal > :) > > Just how is "adding a QObject inheriting member to OSXKeyChain" any > different in terms of additional overhead than just letting the class itself > inherit QObject? > > What I might do is define an additional class in QOSXKeychain.h, > inheriting QTimer (which inherits QObject), give it a reference to the wallet > instance, and then replace the QTimer* member in WalletPrivate with a pointer > to that new class. That way the QObject overhead only occurs when I'm > actually going to use the timer. Sounds like a plan to me (but that may just > be the time of night ^^)
> how is "adding a QObject inheriting member to OSXKeyChain" any different in > terms of additional overhead Isn't at all. It's just easier to revert since in Qt5 you can just use a lambda slot (what means you can write the functionality inline into the connect - no need for a slot function anywhere) You can use the QTimer Object for this, yes (it'd be a bit wonky for some public interface, but as a semi-private class, there's no problem with this) - Thomas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120202/#review67155 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 21, 2014, 4:40 nachm., René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120202/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 21, 2014, 4:40 nachm.) > > > Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and kdelibs. > > > Repository: kdelibs > > > Description > ------- > > I'm still working on (the KDE4-based version of) my OS X keychain backend for > kwallet. I'm at a point where I think I can present a work-in-progress in an > RR because at least one feature has been improved enough to be of interest > for everyone, and also because I could use feedback on how to proceed. > I'm currently focussing on 2 settings that are configured in the kwallet KCM > (SystemSettings), and for which I'm working on an implementation not > requiring kwalletd and/or DBus. > > - idle time closing of wallets. This feature was not supported in the > commited version presented in https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119838/ The > present patch adds an idleTimer and a shared lastAccessTime member. The > idleTimer is reset each time a client performs one of a series of actions > that I count as wallet accesses, and before resetting I update the idle > timeout value from KConfig. When the timer fires, the elapsed time is > compared to the shared last access time, and if it is >= the timeout, the > wallet is closed. This applies only to "KDE keychains", so keychains used by > OS X applications should not be affected. > > - "close when last application exits". This requires maintaining a "user > list" which keeps track of what application has what wallet open. I've > implemented an "internal" version of such a registry, mapping wallet name to > application names and the list of wallets they have open (a list of wallet > reference, pid per application name). The registry is functional, but I have > not yet decided (read: figured out) how to make a distributed representation > of it. > > So the work-in-progress concerns the distributed user registry. The idea > would be to maintain the registry in shared memory, meaning it'd be reset (= > disappear) when the last application exits, contrary to a file which can go > stale. This would be simple if QSharedMemory objects could be resized, but > apparently they cannot, so I'll have to look at other solutions possibly > involving OS X frameworks (NSData and it's non-objectiveC version CFDataRef > or CFMutableDataRef might be candidates). Suggestions welcome. > > Other work in progress concerns a less wheel-reinventing approach that builds > on kwalletd and DBus. I don't see why the code used in `kwallet.cpp` wouldn't > work, but I must still misunderstand its finer details. The present patch > contains outcommented code that does indeed cause kwalletd to be launched and > slots and signals to become visible e.g. in `qdbusviewer`. But they don't > work, which in turn makes the whole kwallet layer dysfunctional. Here too > feedback is welcome on how what I'm missing and/or how to get this to work. > Once kwalletd works, wallet idle timeout closing and closing when the last > client exits should work out-of-the-box, or at least I suppose. > > > Diffs > ----- > > kdeui/util/kwallet.h d7f703f > kdeui/util/kwallet_mac.cpp 8344ebb > kdeui/util/qosxkeychain.h d0934e6 > kdeui/util/qosxkeychain.cpp 7cb9a22 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120202/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > OS X 10.6.8, kdelibs 4.14.1 git/master, KDE/MacPorts 4.12.5 . > Once finalised, all changes should port easily to KF5's kwallet_mac.cpp . > > > Thanks, > > René J.V. Bertin > >
